Validating anthropogenic threat maps as a tool for assessing river ecological integrity in Andean-Amazon basins.

Andean–Amazon rivers and streams Conservation planning Freshwater ecosystems GIS Predictive modeling Spatial patterns

Journal

PeerJ
ISSN: 2167-8359
Titre abrégé: PeerJ
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101603425

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
received: 01 04 2019
accepted: 18 10 2019
entrez: 27 11 2019
pubmed: 27 11 2019
medline: 27 11 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Anthropogenic threat maps are commonly used as a surrogate for the ecological integrity of rivers in freshwater conservation, but a clearer understanding of their relationships is required to develop proper management plans at large scales. Here, we developed and validated empirical models that link the ecological integrity of rivers to threat maps in a large, heterogeneous and biodiverse Andean-Amazon watershed. Through fieldwork, we recorded data on aquatic invertebrate community composition, habitat quality, and physical-chemical parameters to calculate the ecological integrity of 140 streams/rivers across the basin. Simultaneously, we generated maps that describe the location, extent, and magnitude of impact of nine anthropogenic threats to freshwater systems in the basin. Through seven-fold cross-validation procedure, we found that regression models based on anthropogenic threats alone have limited power for predicting the ecological integrity of rivers. However, the prediction accuracy improved when environmental predictors (slope and elevation) were included, and more so when the predictions were carried out at a coarser scale, such as microbasins. Moreover, anthropogenic threats that amplify the incidence of other pressures (roads, human settlements and oil activities) are the most relevant predictors of ecological integrity. We concluded that threat maps can offer an overall picture of the ecological integrity pattern of the basin, becoming a useful tool for broad-scale conservation planning for freshwater ecosystems. While it is always advisable to have finer scale in situ measurements of ecological integrity, our study shows that threat maps provide fast and cost-effective results, which so often are needed for pressing management and conservation actions.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31769445
doi: 10.7717/peerj.8060
pii: 8060
pmc: PMC6874857
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e8060

Informations de copyright

© 2019 Lessmann et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Références

Sci Total Environ. 2016 Dec 15;573:1079-1088
pubmed: 27632785
Proc Biol Sci. 2016 Jun 15;283(1832):
pubmed: 27306051
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005 Feb 28;360(1454):397-413
pubmed: 15814353
Conserv Biol. 2011 Feb;25(1):30-9
pubmed: 20735451
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35126
pubmed: 22529979
Environ Monit Assess. 2009 Apr;151(1-4):143-60
pubmed: 18493861
Environ Monit Assess. 2002 Aug;78(1):45-61
pubmed: 12197640
Environ Sci Technol. 2010 Dec 15;44(24):9364-9
pubmed: 21069953
Ecol Evol. 2016 Jun 24;6(14):4997-5012
pubmed: 27547329
Ecol Indic. 2018 Feb 01;85:1133-1148
pubmed: 29628801
Ecol Appl. 2016 Sep;26(6):1785-1796
pubmed: 27755704
Science. 2016 Jan 8;351(6269):128-9
pubmed: 26744397
Ambio. 2015 Sep;44(5):412-25
pubmed: 25572836
Sci Adv. 2018 Jan 31;4(1):eaao1642
pubmed: 29399629
Science. 2019 Sep 13;365(6458):1124-1129
pubmed: 31515386
Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2014 Jan;23(1):40-51
pubmed: 26430385
Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2004 Mar;15(3):205-11
pubmed: 15096294
Nature. 2017 Jun 14;546(7658):363-369
pubmed: 28617466
Environ Manage. 2007 Jan;39(1):125-38
pubmed: 17123003
Ecol Appl. 2012 Dec;22(8):2188-203
pubmed: 23387119
Glob Chang Biol. 2016 Mar;22(3):990-1007
pubmed: 26700407

Auteurs

Janeth Lessmann (J)

Instituto BIÓSFERA, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.
Departamento de Ecología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad, Santiago de Chile, Chile.

Maria J Troya (MJ)

Instituto BIÓSFERA, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.

Alexander S Flecker (AS)

Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.

W Chris Funk (WC)

Department of Biology, Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.

Juan M Guayasamin (JM)

Instituto BIÓSFERA, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.
Centro de Investigación de la Biodiversidad y Cambio Climático (BioCamb) e Ingeniería en Biodiversidad y Recursos Genéticos, Facultad de Ciencias de Medio Ambiente, Universidad Tecnológica Indoamérica, Quito, Ecuador.

Valeria Ochoa-Herrera (V)

El Politécnico, Colegio de Ciencias e Ingenierías, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.
Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

N LeRoy Poff (NL)

Department of Biology, Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Esteban Suárez (E)

Instituto BIÓSFERA, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.

Andrea C Encalada (AC)

Instituto BIÓSFERA, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador.
MARE, Department of Life Sciences, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Department of Geography, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Classifications MeSH